Supreme CourtDivision Bench(2000) 07 SC CK 0074

H.V.P.N.L. vs Mahavir

Supreme Court Of India · Decided on 21 July 2000 · Citation: AIR 2000 SC 3586 : (2000) AIRSCW 3931 : (2000) 5 SCALE 587 : (2001) 10 SCC 659

HON’BLE JUDGES
M. Jagannadha Rao, J · Doraiswamy Raju, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
S.L.P. (C) No. 9979 of 2000

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 229 words
1.

In a number of cases coming up in appeal in this Court, we find that the State Consumer Disputes Redressal, Commission Haryana at Chandigarh is passing a standard order in the following terms:

We have heard the Law Officer of the H.V.P.N. - appellant and have also perused the impugned order. We do not find any legal infirmity in the detailed and well-reasoned order passed by District Forum, Kaithal. Accordingly, we uphold the impugned order and dismissed the appeal

2.

We may point out that while dealing with a First Appeal, this is not the way to dispose of the matter. The Appellate Forum is bound to refer to the pleadings of the case, the submissions of the counsel, necessary points for consideration, discuss the evidence and dispose of the matter by giving valid reasons. It is very easy to dispose of any appeal in this fashion and the higher Courts would not know whether learned State Commission had applied its mind to the case. We hope that such orders will not be passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana at Chandigarh in future. A copy of this order may be communicated to the Commission.

3.

Issue notice for remand of the matter to the State Commission, for disposal afresh in accordance with law.

4.

Status quo, as of today, shall be maintained by the parties.